Injection Risk Behaviors Among Clients of Syringe Exchange Programs with Different Syringe Dispensation Policies

Published in: Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, v. 37, no. 2, Oct. 1, 2004, p. 1307-1312

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2004

by Alex H. Kral, Rachel Anderson, Neil M. Flynn, Ricky N. Bluthenthal

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.jaids.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

While there have been numerous papers published in the medical, social, and epidemiologic literature about the effectiveness of syringe exchange programs (SEPs), few papers identify operational characteristics of the SEPs they study or assess which of those characteristics are associated with optimal HIV risk reduction among clients. The objective of this study was to examine whether different syringe dispensation policies were associated with client-level injection- related HIV risk. Injection drug users (IDUs) were recruited at 23 SEPs in California in 2001 (n = 531). SEPs were classified by their executive directors as to whether they provided a strict one-for-one syringe exchange, gave a few extra syringes above the one-for-one exchange, or distributed the amount of syringes based upon need as opposed to how many syringes were turned in by the clients. Injection- related risk was compared by SEP program type. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, clients of distribution-based programs had lower odds of reusing syringes (adjusted odds ratio = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.27, 0.71) when adjusting for confounding variables. There were no statistical differences with regards to distributive or receptive syringe sharing by dispensation policy. It is concluded that SEPs that base syringe dispensation policy upon need may facilitate reductions in reuse of syringes.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.